A close-up look at NYC education policy, politics,and the people who have been, are now, or will be affected by acts of corruption and fraud. ATR CONNECT assists individuals who suddenly find themselves in the ATR ("Absent Teacher Reserve") pool and are the "new" rubber roomers, and re-assigned. The terms "rubber room" and "ATR" mean that you or any person has been targeted for removal from your job. A "Rubber Room" is not a place, but a process.

New York City Department of Education, et al.,
Respondents-Appellants. The Council of School Supervisors and Administrators,
Amicus Curiae.

Respondents appeal from the order and judgment
(one paper) of the Supreme Court, New York County (Peter H. Moulton, J.),
entered April 23, 2015, which granted the petition seeking, inter alia, a
determination that respondents violated the Open Meetings Law by denying the
general public (petitioner) access to meetings of a New York City public
schools School Leadership Team.

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, New
York (Mark Ladov of counsel) and Advocates for Justice, New York (Laura
D. [*2]Barbieri of counsel), for Letitia James and
Class Size Matters, respondents.

David N. Grandwetter and Marvin Pope, New York,
for the Council of School Supervisors and Administrators, amicus curiae.

KAPNICK, J.

In this article 78
proceeding, petitioner sought, inter alia, a declaration that School Leadership
Teams (SLTs) at New York City public schools are “public bodies” whose meetings
must be open to the general public pursuant to the Open Meetings Law.[FN1]

Background

The Education Law
requires each New York City public school to have a “school-based management
team” (SBMT) (Education Law §§ 2590-h[15][b], [b-1]). By regulation, respondent
New York City Department of Education (DOE) has implemented this mandate through
the establishment of SLTs in every school (see Mulgrew v Board of Educ. of City
Sch. Dist. of City of N.Y., 75 AD3d 412,
413 [1st Dept 2010]; NYC Chancellor’s Regulations [CR] A-655). SLTs have
between 10 and 17 members, made up of school parents, teachers, staff, and
administrators, and may also include “representatives of Community Based
Organizations” (CR A-655 §§ III[A],[B],[C][2]). The school principal, president
of the parent association, and chapter leader of the teachers’ union must be
members. At least two student members are also required for each high school (id. at [C][2]). SLTs must meet at least once a
month “at a time that is convenient for the parent representatives” (Education
Law § 2590-h[15][b-1][ii]). Notice of this meeting must be provided in a manner
“consistent with the open meetings law” (Education Law § 2590-h[15][b-1][iii]).

The SLT helps formulate
“school-based educational policies” and ensure that “resources are aligned to
implement those policies” (CR A-655 § I; see Education
Law § 2590-h[15][b-1][i]). The SLT’s primary responsibility is to develop the
school’s annual comprehensive education plan (CEP), which sets the school’s
needs, goals, and instructional strategies (see Education
Law § 2590-h[15][b-1][i]; CR A-655 § II). In this regard, the SLT “must use
consensus based decision-making and must seek assistance” from the “District
Leadership Team” or the district superintendent “if it is unable to reach
consensus on the CEP” (CR A-655 § II[A][4]). If the SLT is “still not able to
reach consensus,” then the superintendent “shall make the determination on
developing the CEP” (id.).

SLTs also “consult on the school-based budget
pursuant to” Education Law § 2590-r. That section, in turn, provides for “the
principal to propose a school-based budget, after consulting with members of
the” SLT (Education Law § 2590-r[b][i]). Consistent with these statutory
provisions, DOE regulations make clear that the principal “is responsible for”
and “makes the final determination concerning the school-based budget,” albeit
only after “consult[ing] with the SLT during this development process so that
the budget will be aligned with the CEP” (CR A-655 § II[A][2]).

Petitioner is a retired DOE mathematics teacher.
On March 17, 2014, petitioner asked the Chair (Victoria Trombetta) and three
mandatory members (Linda Hill, Principal; Laura Cavalerri, [*3]PTA President; and Francesco Portelos, UFT Chapter Leader) of the
SLT for IS 49, a Staten Island middle school, for permission to attend the
SLT’s next meeting. By email dated March 18, 2014, Trombetta invited petitioner
to attend the SLT’s April 1 meeting.

On March 19, 2014, Trombetta rescinded the
invitation. Trombetta explained that she had “reviewed the SLT Bylaws” and
“realized” that “only” “school community members” are “permitted to attend” SLT
meetings. Since petitioner was “not a member of the school community,” he could
not attend a meeting. Petitioner agreed with Trombetta that the SLT’s “bylaws
are consistent with DOE policy,” but explained that he wanted to “challenge
that policy in court” and needed to be “denied entrance onsite” in order to “have
standing.'” Petitioner informed Trombetta that he would attempt to gain
entrance to the meeting. On April 1, 2014, petitioner presented himself to
security at IS 49’s front entrance, and was denied admittance to the SLT
meeting.

Thereafter, petitioner commenced
this article 78 proceeding by notice and petition verified May 17, 2014.
Petitioner contended that the SLT was a “public body,” such that its refusal to
permit him to attend the meeting violated the Open Meetings Law. DOE served an
answer verified August 19, 2014, denying the petition’s material allegations
and asserting affirmative defenses. Petitioner served a reply verified August
26, 2014, responding to the answer.[FN2]

Supreme Court granted
the petition and found that “SLT meetings entail a public body performing
governmental functions,” and are thus “subject to the Open Meetings Law.”
Relying on Matter of Perez v City Univ. of N.Y. (5 NY3d 522 [2005]) and Matter of Smith v City Univ. of
N.Y. (92 NY2d 707 [1999]), the court reasoned:

“First, SLTs are established pursuant to the
Education Law, which gives them a role in school governance. DOE’s own by-laws
specify that SLTs are part of the governance structure’ of New York City’s
Schools. The public’s interest in SLT meetings is demonstrated by the fact that
announcement of such meetings must be made in accordance with the Open Meetings
Law.

“Second, . . . SLTs play a crucial iterative
role in developing CEPs and ensuring that CEPs are aligned with the school’s
budget. A principal must consult with her school’s SLT in developing a CEP. If
the principal and her SLT cannot agree on the contours of the annual CEP, then
the District Superintendent may resolve the difference. However, the SLT must
have input into the CEP’s development. In December 2007 the DOE issued a prior
version of Regulation A-655 which gave principals in New York City final decision
making authority over the CEP. The State Education Commissioner ruled that the
regulation was in derogation of Education Law § 2590-h(15)(b-1), because it
stripped the SLTs of [*4]their basic, statutorily mandated authority to
develop the CEP.’

“The CEP is an important blueprint at each
school. It describes annual goals concerning student achievement, teacher
training, parent involvement, and compliance with federal law including Title
I. The CEP also includes action plans’ to achieve those goals. . . . [T]he role
of an SLT in formulating its school’s CEP is one of decision maker. In
fulfilling this role the SLT acts in conjunction with, and not subordinate to,
the school’s principal. If it is fulfilling its statutory role, a school’s SLT
is not a mere advisor to the principal. SLTs are also stakeholders and
participants in school closings. These SLT activities touch on the core
functions of a public school. The proper functioning of public schools is a
public concern, not a private concern limited to the families who attend a
given public school” (citations and footnotes omitted).

Accordingly, the court
held that DOE’s “failure to open School Leadership Team Meetings to the general
public pursuant to the Open Meetings Law is arbitrary and capricious and
contrary to law.”[FN3]

Promulgated in 1976
following the Watergate scandal, the Open Meetings Law “was intended — as its
very name suggests — to open the decision-making process of elected officials
to the public while at the same time protecting the ability of the government
to carry out its responsibilities,” and its provisions are “to be liberally
construed in accordance with the statute’s purposes” (Matter of Gordon v Village of Monticello, 87 NY2d 124,
126-127 [1995]). In enacting the law, “the Legislature sought to ensure that
public business be performed in an open and public manner and that the citizens
of this state be fully aware of and able to observe the performance of public
officials and attend and listen to the deliberations and decisions that go into
the making of public policy'” (Matter of Perez v City Univ. of
N.Y., 5 NY3d at 528; Public Officers Law § 100).

The Open Meetings Law provides generally that “[e]very
meeting of a public body shall be open to the general public” (Public Officers
Law § 103 [a]). The statute defines “public body” as “any entity, for which a
quorum is required in order to conduct public business and which consists of
two or more members, performing a governmental function for the state or for an
agency or department thereof” (Public Officers Law § 102[2]). A “meeting” is
“the official convening of a public body for the purpose of conducting public
business” (Public Officers Law § 102[1]).

Whether an entity is a
public body turns on various criteria, including “the authority under which the
entity was created, the power distribution or sharing model under which it
exists, the nature of its role, the power it possesses and under which it
purports to act, and a realistic appraisal of its functional relationship to
affected parties and constituencies” (Matter of Smith v City Univ. of
N.Y., 92 NY2d at 713).

The “mere giving of
advice, even about governmental matters, is not itself a governmental function”
(Goodson Todman Enters. v Town Bd. of Milan, 151 AD2d
642, 643 [2d Dept 1989], lv denied 74
NY2d 614 [1989]). It has thus been held that an entity which is “advisory in
nature” and “d[oes] not perform governmental functions” will not be deemed to
be a “public body” for purposes of the Open Meetings Law (Matter of Jae v Board of Educ. of
Pelham Union Free School Dist., 22 AD3d 581,
584 [2d Dept 2005], lv denied 6
NY3d 714 [2006]; see also Smith, 92 NY2d at
714 [“It may be that an entity exercising only an advisory function would not
qualify as a public body within the purview of the Open Meetings Law”]). By
contrast, “a formally chartered entity with officially delegated duties and
organizational attributes of a substantive nature . . . should be deemed a
public body that is performing a governmental function” (Smith, 92 NY2d at 714).

If a court “determines that a public body failed
to comply with [the Open Meetings Law], the court shall have the power, in its
discretion, upon good cause shown, to declare that the public body violated
[the Open Meetings Law] and/or declare the action taken . . . void” (Public
Officers Law § 107[1]).

DOE argues that the SLTs do not perform
“governmental functions” characteristic of public bodies under the Open
Meetings Law, but rather merely “serve a collaborative, advisory function.”
Amicus curiae Council of School Supervisors and Administrators supports DOE’s
arguments and emphasizes that opening SLT meetings to the public would
frustrate SLTs’ collaborative goals by permitting outsiders to “attend for
their own personal agendas or satisfaction in open or veiled dissonance from”
the SLT’s purpose.

Petitioner, along with intervenors Letitia James
and Class Size Matters, argue that the trial court properly analyzed the
question of whether SLTs are public bodies because they were created under the
authority of state law as a mandatory and necessary part of the governing structure
of the New York City public school system.

As the IAS court
properly found, under the factors set forth in Smith and Perez, SLTs qualify as a public body performing
governmental functions, and, therefore, are subject to the Open Meetings Law.

It cannot be disputed that SLTs are established
pursuant to state law and are a part of DOE’s “governance structure.” It also
cannot be disputed that SLTs have decision making authority to set educational
and academic goals for a school through the CEP. The notion that SLTs merely
serve an advisory role is not supported by the regulatory history. As the IAS
court pointed out in its decision, in December 2007, the DOE issued a prior
version of Regulation A-655 in an effort to give principals the final decision
making authority over CEPs. However, the revised regulation was overruled by
the State Education Commissioner because it violated the Education Law’s
mandate that SLTs have a “basic, statutorily mandated authority” to develop the
CEP.

Although principals do
have the final approval over a school’s budget, principals must consult with
SLTs, so that the budget and the CEP can be aligned. The fact that the SLT and
principal must collaborate with each other does not, in and of itself,
disqualify the SLT from being considered a public body performing governmental
functions (see Perez, 5 NY3d at 530).

Moreover, state law requires that an SLT hold
monthly meetings during the school year and that notice of the meetings be
provided in accordance with the Open Meetings Law. This is a clear indication
of the public concern over the functioning of SLTs and public schools in
general.

Accordingly, the order and judgment (one paper)
of the Supreme Court, New York County (Peter H. Moulton, J.), entered April 23,
2015, granting the petition seeking, inter alia, a determination that
respondents violated the Open Meetings Law by denying the general public
(petitioner) access to a meeting of a New York City public school’s SLT, should
be affirmed, [*5]without costs.

Footnote 1: The parties and the IAS court, however,
treated this proceeding as a pure article 78 proceeding and not a hybrid
article 78/declaratory judgment action. Thus, the court reviewed respondents’
determination to deny petitioner access to the meeting under the arbitrary and
capricious standard and made no declaration.

Footnote 2: By order to show cause dated January 12,
2015, Letitia James, the New York City Public Advocate, and Class Size Matters,
a New York-based nonprofit organization dedicated to achieving smaller class
sizes across the country, moved to intervene as petitioners. The intervenors
served a proposed petition generally echoing the main petition. The
intervenors’ application was granted as part of the order on appeal
herein.

Footnote 3: By order entered October 15, 2015, this
Court ruled that an automatic stay of the order is in effect, pursuant to CPLR
5519(a)(1). By order entered December 29, 2015, this Court granted the Council
of School Supervisors and Administrators leave to appear as amicus
curiae.

TV Appearances by Betsy Combier

Lawline

Contact me with a concern or issue

I assist anyone who needs help, so email me your problem to start the ball rolling! I am a teacher/parent advocate, and I am the editor/writer for this blog and the website parentadvocates.org. I also write about court corruption on my blog "NYC Court Corruption". I am interested in random injustice and the criminalizing of innocent people. If you want to chat you may email me at: betsy.combier@gmail.com and I'm on twitter and have a facebook page too. I'm not an attorney and do not give legal advice.

If you want to talk with me about your 3020-a charges, I consult and go over your case without charge. No fee.

And, in response to the lies of certain individuals who resent my work, the truth is that all conversations are confidential and I do not tape secretly.

Testimonial from an Exonerated Teacher

Dear Betsy,I am forever indebted to you, Betsy, for your expert counsel throughout a horrific ordeal. You worked tirelessly to prove my innocence in a 3020a proceeding that was instigated by a corrupt school district and fueled by lies. My proceedings ended with my complete exoneration, my record expunged and my immediate return to the classroom. We didn't even need to file an appeal! Thank you, Betsy. I am now eligible to retire and enjoy the benefits you helped me to protect. God bless you and the work you do protecting the innocent.Sincerely,Maria Gargano

My Thoughts and Raison d'etre

This blog is about the denial of Constitutional rights by the Mayor, the New York City Department of Education and the Chancellor, New York State and Federal Courts, New York State legislature, and the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), as well as PACs and all parties participating in the business of public school education in New York City, to harm and in neglect of parents, children, and staff of public schools in the five boroughs. These thoughts are not simply mindless conclusions reached out of thin air, but a result of 14 years of research into the NYC DOE and the Courts as a reporter and paralegal.
I am an advocate of Unions and union rights, public schools and charters, and learning online as well as outside of the classroom. I cannot and do not support anyone, whether they be union management, government, private members of the political or legal system, or simply retired teachers with an agenda, if he or she tramples, discards, or rebuffs anyone's individual civil rights. As a reporter, journalist, advocate, researcher and paralegal, I have created this blog to inform the public about my experience working for the UFT and being the parent of four daughters who went through the public school system in NYC, as well as examine issues that flow from the massive denial of due process rights that I saw and have documented. The two most important points you should remember: first, everyone at the New York City Board/Department of Education and all Union bigs are motivated by power and money, and looking good. If anyone dares to blow the whistle on these racketeers, retaliation follows, so be a strategist; second, I am not an Attorney and nothing I write or say is legal advice, simply my thoughts. Take 'em or leave 'em.
Betsy Combier, Editor
NYC Rubber Room Reporter
http://nycrubberroomreporter.blogspot.com
New York Court Corruption
http://newyorkcourtcorruption.blogspot.com
Parentadvocates.org
http://www.parentadvocates.org
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/betsy.combier
Twitter: http://twitter.com/BetsyCombier
The NYC Public Voice
http://nycpublicvoice.blogspot.com/betsy.combier@gmail.com
Lawline July 27, 2011
http://www.teachem.com/lawlinetv/learn/lawline-tv-teachers-unions-the-last-in-first-out-rule/

Principal Anne Seifullah changes her image so that she can keep her job amidst sexting and trysts in the school, Robert Wagner Secondary Sch...

Google + Rubber Room Community

FAITH

When we walk to the edge of all the light we have and take the step into the darkness of the unknown, we must believe that one of two things will happen. There will be something solid for us to stand on or we will be taught to fly. Patrick Overton

Truth Seeks Light - Lies Seek Shadows

Twins Jill Danger (left) and Betsy Combier(right)

sayin like it is

Actions Have Consequences

Writing as Music

Rubber Room teachers wish me a happy birthday (2006)

"Educating the mind without educating the heart is no education at all."

Rubber Room Satire

The Labor Movement

The Teaching Equation

We Can Work Out Our Differences

The E-Accountability Foundation

The E-Accountability Foundation brings you this blog which highlights issues that have or should be read by people interested in civil rights, and accountability. The E-Accountability Foundation is a 501(C)3 organization that holds people accountable for their actions online and, through the internet, seeks to bring justice to anyone who has been harmed without reason. We give the'A for Accountability' Awardto those who are willing to blow the whistle on unjust, misleading, or false actions and claims of the politico-educational complex in order to bring about educational reform in favor of children of all races, intellectual ability and economic status.

AddThis

Performance Management - Office of Labor Relations

From Betsy Combier

The NYC Office of Labor Relations, with the support of the UFT, has issued to principals a document called"Performance Management" on how to get rid of an incompetent teacher. Who is an "incompetent teacher"? Anyone the NYC Department of Education wants to remove from the system because he/she is too senior (makes too much money), is disabled (and therefore cannot be deemed factory-perfect) and/or is other impaired (is a whistleblower, cannot be intimidated, is ethnically challenged - not the 'right' race, etc).

Candace R. McLaren

Director, Office of Special Investigations (OSI)

Google+ Badge

Google+ Followers

Follow by Email

Polo Colon

"Rubber Room"

(1) a space where a worker subject to a disciplinary hearing or other administrative action waits and does no work; generally, a place or personal mind-set of isolation.(2) a literal reference to a padded cell, which is, according to the New Oxford American Dictionary, “a room in a psychiatric hospital with padded walls to prevent violent patients from injuring themselves.”from Double-Tongued Dictionary http://www.doubletongued.org/index.php/dictionary/rubber_room/

"Rubberization"

The word "rubberization" is a new word that is used to describe the process of assigning and paying people to sit and do nothing in a drab room away from their place of employment while their employers make up charges that allege sexual or corporal misconduct without any facts upon which to base the allegation on.

Email Subscriptions powered by FeedBlitz

Theresa Europe, NYC BOE ATU Director

Robin Greenfield

Deputy Counsel to the NYC DOE

UFT Pres. Mike Mulgrew and NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg

UFT umbrella pals

New York State Supreme Court Judge Manuel Mendez

ATR CONNECT

Tenured Teachers who are found to be guilty of misconduct or incompetency at 3020-a but are not terminated, who have blown the whistle on the misconduct of politically favored NYC Department of Education employees, and/or who are simply disliked for any reason can suddenly find themselves in the ATR ("Absent Teacher Reserve") pool - employees without rights or voices, and without chapter leader union representation.

This new group of people are the "new" rubber roomers without representation at the UFT and denied the protection of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, because basically they have been pushed out of their jobs unfairly and under color of law by Mayor Bloomberg and the Chief Executives of the Department of Education who call themselves "Chancellors", "Network Leaders", "Superintendents", etc., consistently without any facts or evidence to support the false claims.

A group of teachers who are, or were, made into ATRs, ATR Polo Colon, and I, Betsy Combier, an advocate for transparency and labor/employment rights, have joined together to expose the denial of due process, civil and human rights by chiefs of the NYC Department of Education (NYC DOE), certain arbitrators at 3020-a, leaders of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), the "investigators" -agents who work for the Special Commissioner of Investigation (SCI), Office of Special Investigation (OSI), and the Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO) - and the Attorneys who work for the New York United Teachers (NYSUT), and the New York Law Department (Corporation Counsel).

In order to protect the safety of those who join this group to promote an end to the "Rubberization" process described on this blog since 2007, names of those who tell their stories will, for now, remain anonymous if the person so desires, and Polo and I will be the gatekeepers. So if you are an ATR, or know a story involving an ATR or someone re-assigned or about to go into a 3020-a, please use the email address advocatz77@gmail.com and give us your contact information. We will protect your anonymity and hold onto your privacy.

Betsy Combier and Polo Colon, Editors

FAITH When we walk to the edge of all the light we have and take the step into the darkness of the unknown, we must believe that one of two things will happen. There will be something solid for us to stand on or we will be taught to fly.

Patrick Overton

We have forty million reasons for failure but not a single excuse.Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)

The Re-Assignment Overview by Betsy Combier

The New York City Board of Education decided in 2002 to rid the public school system of staff who interfered with their takeover and control. The criteria for a "good teacher" is now, more often than not, a "silent teacher", a person who never asks questions, is younger than 40, is making a salary below $50,000, does not care about kids and what they learn, or whether or not money (books, supplies, equipment, etc) is missing. When a teacher or staff member of a school dares to do the right thing and speaks out about wrong-doing - this person is often called a "whistleblower" or "flamethrower" - or, simply is not liked for any reason by the Principal/NYC personnel, suddenly he/she is accused of something by somebody ("given a label of "A", "B", "C", and so on) and whisked away to a drab room called a temporary re-assignment center or "rubber room". Members of the offices of the Special Commissioner of Investigation or the Office of Special Investigations then start work on building a case against the person to justify their being thrown in prison, declared "unfit for duty", or, as Mr. Joel Klein has said, characterized as "guilty of sexual activities and corporal punishment" against the children of New York City.The stories of the people I have met who sit every day in the 8 rubber rooms of NYC prove to me that Mr. Klein is very wrong about his assessment, and this blog is created to prove it to you.

Puppy Snooze

US Department of Labor ELAWS

Aeri Pang, Gotcha Squad Attorney

Attorney Pang, red dress, now chief Attorney For New York State Supreme Court Judge Cynthia Kern

New York State Supreme Court Judge Cynthia Kern

NYC EdStats You Can Use

$12.5 billion: Annual New York City Department of Education (DOE) budget (2002)

$21 billion: Annual New York City DOE budget (2009)
1,719: Number officials employed by the DOE central administration in June 2002

2,442: Number of officials employed by the central administration as of November 2008

2: Number of DOE officials earning more than $180,000 per year in 2004.

22: Number of DOE officials earning more than $180,000 per year in 2007.

5: Number of DOE public relations staffers in 2003.

23: Number of DOE public relations staffers in 2008.

944: Number of contracts approved by DOE in 2008, at a total cost of $1.9 billion.

20: Percentage of contracts that exceeded estimated cost by at least 25 percent.

$67.5 million: Annual budget of Project Arts, a decade-old program that was the sole source of dedicated funding for arts education. It was eliminated in 2007.

86: Percentage of principals who said in a 2008 poll that they were unable to provide a quality education because of excessive class sizes in their schools.

100,000: Number of seats DOE plans to provide for charter school students by 2012.

25,000: Number of seats DOE plans to build under 2010 to 2014 capital plan.

66,895: Number of K-3 school-children in classes of 25 or more during the 2008-09 school year.

15,440: Average number of seats per year built during the last six years of the Rudolph Giuliani administration.

10,895: Average number of seats per year built during the first six years of the Bloomberg administration.

27.2: Percentage of newly hired teachers in 2001-02 who were Black.

14.1: Percentage of newly hired teachers in 2006-07 who were Black.

53.3: Percentage of newly hired teachers in 2001-02 who were white.

65.5: Percentage of newly hired teachers in 2006-07 who were white.

76: Percentage of white and Asian students who performed better than the average Black and Latino students in 8th grade English Language Arts (ELA) in 2003.

75: Percentage of white and Asian students who performed better than the average Black and Hispanic students in 8th grade ELA in 2008.

77: Percentage of white and Asian students who performed better than the average Black and Hispanic 8th graders in math in 2003.

81: Percentage of white and Asian students who performed better than the average Black and Hispanic 8th graders in math in 2008.

54: Percentage of New York City public school parents who disapproved of Mayor Bloomberg’s handling of education, according to a March 2009 Quinnipiac poll.

Sources: New York City Council, New York City Comptroller’s Office, New York Daily News, New York Post, Eduwonkette, Quinnipiac Institute, Black Educator, Class Size Matters, New York City Schools Under Bloomberg and Klein.

Betsy Combier and NYSUT lawyer Chris Callagy

The New York City Whistle Award

NYC Whistlers, Winners of the NYC Whistle Award

...are those individuals in New York City who are willing to whistleblow unjust, misleading, or false actions and claims of the politico-educational complex in order to bring about educational reform in favor of children of all races, intellectual ability and economic status. Whistlers ask questions that need to be asked, such as "where is the money?" and "Why does it have to be this way?" and they never give up.

These people have withstood adversity and have held those who seem not to believe in honesty, integrity and compassion accountable for their actions.

Congratulations, and keep up the good work!

Betsy Combier

Special Commissioner of Investigation Richard Condon

Condon "qualified" for his current post after Bloomberg lowered standards; who will leash him?

A great teacher

After being interviewed by the school administration, the prospective teacher said: 'Let me see if I've got this right.

'You want me to go into that room with all those kids, correct their disruptive behavior, observe them for signs of abuse, monitor their dress habits, censor their T-shirt messages, and instill in them a love for learning.

'You want me to check their backpacks for weapons, wage war on drugs and sexually transmitted diseases, and raise their sense of self esteem and personal pride.

'You want me to teach them patriotism and good citizenship, sportsmanship and fair play, and how to register to vote, balance a checkbook, and apply for a job 'You want me to check their heads for lice, recognize signs of antisocial behavior, and make sure that they all pass the final exams.

'You also want me to provide them with an equal education regardless of their handicaps, and communicate regularly with their parents in English, Spanish or any other language, by letter, telephone, newsletter, and report card.

'You want me to do all this with a piece of chalk, a blackboard, a bulletinboard, a few books, a big smile, and a starting salary that qualifies me for food stamps. 'You want me to do all this and then you tell me. . . I CAN'T PRAY?

NYC Police Commissioner Ray Kelly

Joel Klein's famous statement about rubber room teachers and staff

On November 27, 2006, temporarily re-assigned teacher (TRT) Polo Colon asked Joel Klein, the "pretend" Chancellor of the NYC public school system, if he had voted to terminate teachers at the secret Executive Session held just before the public meeting of the Panel For Educational Policy.Mr. Klein answered,"We did not vote to terminate you. We did vote to terminate a teacher in executive Session...in fact, we voted to terminate two teachers. It's perfectly consistent with the law.Many teachers have been charged with sexual activities and some are charged with corporal punishment...I have no interest in removing people who are qualified to teach, I can assure you, because I dont get any return...and in fact, I have complained publicly about how long this process drags out. But our first concern will always be and, as a former lawyer and somebody who clerked on the United States Supreme Court I will tell you, there is no violation of due process whatsoever..."- extracted from the audiotape of the PEP meeting bought by Betsy Combier after filing a FOIL request to the NYC BOE

November 26, 2007 Candelight Vigil

The School Law Blog

A Review of Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools by Betsy Combier

Lydia Segal's book puts the NYC, Chicago, and California Departments of Education on notice....we who have read this book know more about how the system is not there for our kids than "you" want us to know. Lydia Segal's book Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools changes the public school reform movement forever. We can no longer assume that more money allocated to our schools will "fix" the disaster that is our public school system.

Lydia Segal draws on her 10 years of undercover investigation and research in over five urban school districts, including the three largest, New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago, and the two most decentralized, Houston and Edmonton, Canada, to provide, in her new book Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools, the details of the corruption, theft, fraud, and patronage that has overrun our public school establishment for several decades. There is no question that anyone who is interested in school reform -this means anyone who pays taxes, is a parent or guardian of a child attending school and/or who works toward a goal of establishing an education system that puts children first - must read this book. Ms. Segal's research and information on the education establishment's 'dark' side outrages the reader, and incites us to demand change. Her book therefore, is much more than a book, it is a call to action. We cannot be bystanders any longer to the systemic abuse she so vividly describes, and we will never be able to listen in the same way ever again to school Principals, Superintendents, school custodians or district board members as they request more money "to help the children."

The book's detailed reports on the corruption and crime in our public schools, supported by 52 pages of interview notes, references and specific examples, provide irrefutable evidence that the current failures of our nation's public schools are not due to the lack of money but the impossibility of getting the money to the children who need it and for whom the money is allocated in the first place. Recent statistics show that students of all ages are not learning what they need to know, schools are overcome with violence, teachers are demoralized, and yet billions of dollars are literally shovelled into the system every year. The New York City school system receives more than $16 billion every year; Los Angeles, $7 billion; and Chicago, $3.6 billion. Where does this money go? We have all asked this question as we have walked through school hallways dodging the paint falling off the walls and ceilings, watching our children sitting on broken chairs, using bathrooms without running water or toilet paper, and struggling to achieve their personal best without the services and resources they are supposed to have. Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools is the first book ever to systematically examine school waste and corruption and how to fight it. Ms. Segal, an undercover school investigator turned law professor, documents where the money goes, how waste and fraud embedded in the operation of large school bureaucracies siphon money from classrooms, distort educational priorities, block initiatives, and what we can do to bring badly-needed change. She describes in detail how only a small percentage of the money allocated to students in our public schools actually gets used by them due to corruption and waste, and how city school systems scoring lowest on standardized tests tend to have the biggest criminal records and most payroll padding. Coding problems, the procurement process, compartmentalization and opacity of information leave administrators with only two options: good corruption (which ultimately helps the kids) and bad corruption (which never helps anyone but the perpetrator and his/her allies and accomplices). Indeed, the system fights those who try the good corruption route.

Ms. Segal argues that the problem is not usually bad people, but a bad system that focuses on process at the expense of results. Decades of rules and regulations along with layers of top-down supervision make it so hard to do business with school systems that they encourage the very fraud and waste they were designed to curb. She tells us about how the "godfathers" and "godmothers" (the school board members) obtain jobs for their "pieces" in order to protect the systemic waste and fraud from being dismantled or exposed. Fortunately, she writes, there are good people involved in the corruption as well who must violate the rules in order to get their jobs done. Nonetheless, absurdities abound: school systems following rules to save every penny spend thousands of dollars hunting down checks as small as $25; it takes so long to pay vendors for their work that some have to bribe school officials to move their checks along; caring Principals who want to fix leaky toilets may have to pay workers under the table because submitting a work order through the central office could, and often does, take years. Meanwhile, those who pilfer from classrooms get away with it because the pyramidal structure of large districts makes schools inherently difficult to oversee. What makes Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools a must-read is not only the fascinating - and depressing - details of the systemic wrong-doing but also Ms. Segal's suggestions for reform, based on the proven track records of school systems across North America that have successfully reduced waste and fraud and have pushed more resources into schools.

The pathology of the corruption suggests the remedy, Ms. Segal says, which is decentralization of power into the schools and the hands of the Principals. Distilling what successful school systems have done, Segal advocates new forms of oversight that do not clog up school systems and recommends giving principals more discretion over their school budgets as well as holding them accountable for job performance. She argues for "autonomy in exchange for performance accountability" as part of a bold, far-reaching plan for reclaiming our schools. Her conclusion is logical and convincing. Everyone who reads this book will find his or her perception of public school education changed forever. We cannot accept any longer that a generation of children has been abused by a system that is so full of greed and corruption without screaming "stop!" and "Your game is up!"

Segal reveals how systemic waste and fraud siphon millions of dollars from urban classrooms and shows how money is lost in systems that focus on process rather than on results, as well as how regulations established to curb waste and fraud provide perverse incentives for new forms of both. Anyone who is interested in school reform--this means anyone who pays taxes, is a parent or guardian of a child attending school, and/or who works toward a goal of establishing an education system that puts children first--must read this book. --

Lydia G. Segal is Associate Professor of Criminal Law and Public Administration at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York.

The NYC BOE FAMIS Online Tour

The FAMIS Portal Online Tour provides an overview and demonstration of the FAMIS Portal. Computer speakers or headphones are recommended. Choose an item of interest below, or click on the Introduction to proceed through all of the modules in sequence.

About Me

Reporter, paralegal, advocate,I will investigate, search on the internet and in all data bases for information that will help a person in need of resolution to a problem.I believe in substantive and procedural due process for all individuals, groups and organizations and trademarked the term "e-accountability" to describe the purpose of my work. I am the parent of four daughters.

Statcounter

Site Meter

Disclaimer

This page states the general terms of use under which you, the blog visitor (hereinafter "you", "user", or "visitor") may use NYCrubberroomreporter.blogspot.com. By reading this blog, you agree to all of the terms set forth below. You may reprint, copy, and use any article on this website as long as you do not sell or change the article and you cite this blog as your source. This blog reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to change any or all of the provisions of this "Terms of Use & Disclaimer Agreement" at any time; the agreement in effect at the time of your use shall govern your use and your use after the effective date of any changes to these Terms will be deemed acceptance of your acceptance of the changes. We have followed what we believe to be the guidelines of US Code TITLE 17, Chapter 1, Section 107: FAIR USE: "the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phone records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." We will, if asked with good reason to remove any material from our site that the original owner feels may jeopardize their standing before the Law, do so. We oppose violence of any kind, disrespect, verbal or physical abuse, and any kind of theft or hurtful behavior toward anyone at any time, and expect all users of this blog to be mindful of these values and use the information we have collected in good faith. We have made every effort to describe the actions, not motives, of public people, and we have supported everything that we post with documents to prove the validity of what we say in order to not make any fraudulent or false claims. We believe that it is a civic duty to expose wrong-doing, and we have the legal right to name the perpetrators who pursue illegal activities as defined by the respondents to their actions. If a public official or employee writes, says, or does anything that is against the Laws of this country or that falsifies data which leads to the intentional infliction of emotional distress, harassment, verbal and/or physical abuse of a student/parent/teacher, we claim license to post the acts of such people on our website, with the name of the perpetrator. The truth is not defamatory. We claim that we are not "out to get" any particular person.You agree that you do not acquire any ownership rights in any downloaded content. You further agree that all rights in the site and any of the content found on the site not granted to you under this agreement are expressly reserved to the editor. You agree to not extract any content in order to repurpose or resell the site's content or tools, and you agree to not "scrape" and/or reformat any information without the written permission of the editor. This blog protects and enforces copyrights for its' own creative material and respects the copyright property of others, as well as our right to "FAIR USE". We do not permit materials known by us to be infringing on the copyright of others to be on the site, and we ask that you notify us promptly if you believe that any materials infringe upon a third-party copyright. Upon receipt of a proper notice of claimed infringement under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) we will respond promptly to remove or disable access to the material claimed to be infringing that is in our direct control, assuming that there is also infringement of FAIR USE. This agreement and any policies and rules posted on this blog constitute the complete and exclusive and final expression of the agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. No waiver by the editor of this blog or you of any breach or default under this agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding or subsequent breach or default.This blog provides as a service homepages of websites we believe may be helpful to the user; we provide these links and resources solely as a convenience to you, the user, and we do not endorse the content of these sites. We are not responsible for the content of any linked sites and make no representations regarding the content or accuracy of materials on these sites. If you visit any sites linked to this site, you do so at your own risk. We will not assume any responsibility for the servicing or replacing of equipment or data, or any costs for either. This site and its material are provided on an "as is" basis without any warranties of any kind. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES, INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE, SHALL THE EDITOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE SITE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION USE OF OR RELIANCE ON INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THIS BLOG - WHETHER BASED ON WARRANTY, CONTRACT, TORT, OR ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY AND WHETHER THE EDITOR IS ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES - INTERRUPTIONS, ERRORS, DEFECTS, MISTAKES, OMISSIONS, DELETIONS OF FILES, DELAYS IN OPERATION OR TRANSMISSION, NONDELIVERY OF INFORMATION, DISCLOSURE OF COMMUNICATIONS, OR ANY OTHER FAILURE OF PERFORMANCE. THE EDITOR OF THIS BLOG DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, INCLUDING THE WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, NON-INFRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS, AND THE WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. YOU AGREE THAT ANY RECOURSE FOR DISSATISFACTION OR PROBLEMS WITH THIRD-PARTY GOODS OR SERVICES WILL BE SOUGHT FROM THE THIRD-PARTY PROVIDER DIRECTLY.To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, you will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless The EDITOR OF THIS BLOG (and any of her subsidiaries, affiliates, directors, officers, employees, agents, distributors, third party providers, and licensors) from and against all claims, liability, and expenses, including attorney's fees and legal fees and costs, arising out of your use of the site or your breach of any provision of this agreement. The Editor reserves the right, in her sole discretion and at her own expense, to assume the exclusive defense and control of any matter otherwise subject to indemnification by you. You will cooperate as fully as reasonably required in the defense of any claim.This agreement, your performance under it, and any disputes arising under it shall be governed exclusively by the laws of internet usage as stated by the federal courts of the United States. You agree to pay all legal fees incurred by any legal action filed against the Editor of this blog in any action in which she as the defendant prevails.Any information collected about your visit to the web site is non-personal in nature and used solely for the purpose of helping us to assess the areas of our site that are most useful to visitors, and therefore need to be as complete and user-friendly as possible. In the area of listserv sign-ups, contribution data, and/or any other email or membership sign-up option now or in the future on our site, all information is collected on a strictly voluntary and confidential basis, and will not be sold, used or released for any third-party purpose. We do not permit any transactions from or by any person who is 13 years old or younger.